WeirdWilly
12-02-2010, 11:05 AM
The following article, presumably in support of the Bolivarian Revolution, does an amazing job of pointing out the weaknesses of Marxism.
---------------------------------------------------
http://english.eluniversal.com/2010/11/19/en_opi_esp_alan-woods--where-i_18A4747971.shtml
))
The superiority of a nationalised planned economy was demonstrated by the colossal successes of the USSR in the past. These successes were undermined by the bureaucratic distortions that flowed from Stalinism and the corruption, swindling and mismanagement that are the inevitable consequence of a bureaucratic regime. Over a long period these things cancelled out the gains of the planned economy and undermined it. That is what led to the collapse of the USSR, not any inherent defect of central planning.
It was the parasitic existence of the bureaucracy, itself a consequence of the isolation of the revolution in a backward country, which finally led to the restoration of capitalism with the catastrophic social collapse which accompanied it. The bureaucratic planning of the economy led to wastage, mismanagement and corruption. Finally the bureaucracy decided to become themselves the owners of the means of production.
((
---------------------------------------------------
So he has, in two paragraphs, has pointed out the inheritant flaw in socialism! You cannot have central planning without central planners! Central planners = bureaucrats = territorialism and corruption. Central planning = foot dragging and a total resistance to new products, services, methods and procedures.
Reading this article, I am beginning to wonder if it IS an intentional slam against socialism, disguised as a rah rah piece!
---------------------------------------------------
http://english.eluniversal.com/2010/11/19/en_opi_esp_alan-woods--where-i_18A4747971.shtml
))
The superiority of a nationalised planned economy was demonstrated by the colossal successes of the USSR in the past. These successes were undermined by the bureaucratic distortions that flowed from Stalinism and the corruption, swindling and mismanagement that are the inevitable consequence of a bureaucratic regime. Over a long period these things cancelled out the gains of the planned economy and undermined it. That is what led to the collapse of the USSR, not any inherent defect of central planning.
It was the parasitic existence of the bureaucracy, itself a consequence of the isolation of the revolution in a backward country, which finally led to the restoration of capitalism with the catastrophic social collapse which accompanied it. The bureaucratic planning of the economy led to wastage, mismanagement and corruption. Finally the bureaucracy decided to become themselves the owners of the means of production.
((
---------------------------------------------------
So he has, in two paragraphs, has pointed out the inheritant flaw in socialism! You cannot have central planning without central planners! Central planners = bureaucrats = territorialism and corruption. Central planning = foot dragging and a total resistance to new products, services, methods and procedures.
Reading this article, I am beginning to wonder if it IS an intentional slam against socialism, disguised as a rah rah piece!